it's still there even in the two-year budget cycle. i hate to tell you. it doesn't go away completely. having said all those things, this has been a very, very productive conversation. just a couple questions. i don't have one for each of you, but if you want to contribute to an answer, i'd certainly appreciate hearing from any and all of you. but for the sponsors of the bill, looking through the materials we have, currently we have a timetable, a budget timetable that we're supposed to adhere to. and i suppose there are some penalties for not, but i'm not sure what they are because we don't seem to adhere to it very closely. i don't know if it's specific in the legislation, but does that timetable change? and if it doesn't, or even if it does, you know, a rule of government i was told a long time ago that be careful what you -- what space you provide

government because it will grow into the space that's provided. if we allow a two-year window even though we have a timetable that is set, as human as we all are, will we not take that amount of time and just use it and make this a two-year endeavor instead -- >> it's possible. i mean, the timetable stays pretty much the same as it is now. and so with absent an enforcement trigger for the work to get done. believe me in my time here, i've led the charge on trying to force congress to do its work. certainly didn't mean to offend the vice chair of the committee when i talked about the calendar. i wasn't proposing that we never go home. in fact we're home one week every single month and this year we're going to be home all of august and all of october. you may not get a solution -- this idea is not a panacea.

i've never claimed it to be. but i do believe that this would be a quantum leap forward. as do others. mentioned there's opposition to the bill. yes, and they're in the minority now of the house of representatives. outside groups, the bill in its current form supported by americans for tax reform, the committee for a responsible federal budget, the concord coalition, the council for citizens against government waste, no labels, and the third way. mr. chairman, with your permission, i'd like to submit their letters to the record. >> without objection -- >> thank you, mr. chairman. and so, but to address your specific question, until we're willing to actually do the work here, i don't know that any fix whether comprehensive or step by step is going to change that. >> you know, my state, and my

district as a matter of fact, we had a tremendously difficult last couple years as it relates to wildfires. and so i know there would -- are provisions in state government to deal with emergencies and certainly in an annual appropriation process, we're very nimble, theoretically, here in the federal government, to be able to do that. would a biennial budget process here in congress be as nimble, be able to respond to emergencies to different -- >> i'd say given the wildfires your state, my state, and most of the west deal with, we currently have annual budgeting and it's not being dealt with. so flip the question around, annual budget something not the panacea for dealing with disasters and problems. we've seen that out west. we're discriminated against regularly for the greatest

natural disaster that happens out west. you can get money for hurricanes and flooding, but you get nothing for what personally goes on with wildfires. i think it's a big travesty we're seeing in this country right now. it's a real shame we can't get that done. i don't think annual budgeting is a way to get at these disasters any better than any process. they get to go and deal with this in a much more thoughtful way. perhaps we can get to something, a policy that everyone can agree to to deal with disasters during these off seasons. i don't see the annual sessions being any better. i would suggest giving our people giving a chance to deal with these unforeseen circumstances. >> i think later today we're planning as a body to send a

reconciliation bill to the president of the united states maybe for the folks on the con side of this argument. do you think that this would change that reconciliation project -- process in any way for the better or worse if we were passing what's being proposed today? >> it would reduce by half the opportunities for reconciliation for that aspect -- >> just a simple -- >> well, yes, and it -- but there, too, the fact that we have annual budget resolutions and that we have available to us reconciliation processes doesn't mean that we necessarily use it well. the -- a number of people have alluded today to the larger challenges that face us in terms

of entitlement spending and tax expenditures. those are the real drivers of the deficit. and the reconciliation bill is hypothetically the way we address those things. it's the way we did address them back in the '90s when we actually balanced the budget. it wasn't much fun. the political fallout was intense. people didn't like having everything on the table. but four years of balanced budgets, paying off $400 billion of the national debt speaks for itself, i think. so the reconciliation side of this, the authorization side of this with respect to taxes and entitlements is absolutely critical to securing our fiscal future. so i don't think it's particularly desirable to cut the opportunities for that in half, but whether you have the new system or the president system -- the proposed system or the present system is still

going to take a great deal of political will to utilize it. >> i would just say that had several conversations with mr. price of the budget committee asking what my take would be if they amended the bill in markup to do an annual reconciliation as opposed to biennial and i said i would have no objection to it. >> isn't that admission that addressing these issues annually is far better than delaying them for two years? our interest costs are eating our government alive. within eight years, those interest costs will exceed our entire defense budget. we have got to be addressing these issues constantly. and the most important point raised on this is what dr. price said about the fact that these deadlines are what drive oversight. when we do the annual appropriations process, we are

constantly asking the questions of how this money is being spent and how we can bring these expenditures back into balance. that is a very important thing that will be cast aside with the two-year budget cycle. we're told, this will give more time for hearings. we have a lot of hearings now. 767 oversight hearings by authorizing committees last year. 99 appropriations subcommittee hearings last year. all asking these questions. what this will do is mean that these questions instead of being asked every year, it will be asked every two years. and we don't have that kind of time particularly now. >> yet no one at the table argued for a six-month budget or a quarterly budget or a nine-month budget to increase it. so there's nothing magical about one year. one of the biggest benefits of this is to remove some of the political considerations during that election year that's preventing us from getting

budgets at all in election years. >> well, mr. chairman, i appreciate the discussion today. like i said, i think this is a very, very important issue that we need to address. i think having so many sponsors on the bill speaks as much to the tenants of the bill, also to the frustration that is very prevalent from both sides of the aisle. being a freshman, it's just amazing to me that we can't get our budget done. the revelation that the senate hasn't had a budget in how many years? it's just -- it's just something that i think -- rightfully so, the american people are having a hard time understanding as well. efforts to fix the problem i applaud people for bringing ideas up. like i said, this is a very important discussion to have. dr. cole. >> make one comment.

my friend's thoughtful remarks. this is just my opinion. but i don't think the root of the problem is a process problem. you know, i really don't. i think this really gets down to as ms. fox said, a question of political will. and let's take the reconciliation bill we're going to vote on later today. i support that bill. i support the appeal of obamacare, support the defunding of planned parenthood. on the other hand, that bill's going to go to the president's desk and it's going to get vetoed. so you've taken a budget tool and made it a political messaging tool, really. if you wanted to get something done, you would have had some sort of talks and try to get something to the president's desk that he might sign. some measure of entitlement reform. i would have recommended that take the entitlement reform he

proposed himself two years in his budget. he had means testing for medicare. change cpi. why not put those on his desk. he might well veto them because i think his positions have changed. that to me speaks to what our mind set is here. that is where we all have to look into ourselves. i could make the same point on either side. if you want to make a point, then this is a perfectly good way to do it. if you want to deal with the budget realities and the problems, you would have taken something that had a chance and frankly i would have argued it's a far better point to make that you proposed these two things, we've put them on your desk and you're going to veto them because you didn't get something else you wanted even though you said you are for these things. sending something to the president called obamacare means you're going to get a veto. how are you going to repeal obamacare while a guy named

obama is president of the united states unless you have overwhelming majorities which we don't have. i would just suggest again nothing against looking at the processes. mr. ribble is one of the most thoughtful and -- members we have here. and i particularly like his suggestion which he has made about the date and making sure that we stay here and spend august in lovely washington, d.c. it would do wonders in moving those appropriations bills across the floor. so i think there's a lot of these process ideas, and particularly deadline ideas that do work and are worth thinking about. i hope we use this not just to talk about -- but to reflect a little bit on how we approach the appropriations and budget process on both sides of the aisle and whether or not again we want to fund the government which is what appropriations is basically about or whether we want to score political points. whether we want to deal with entitlement funding and tax

expenditures or whether we don't. those bills somehow never make it to the floor. at least appropriations bills go to the full committee. i've been here 13 years. i haven't seen a social security reform bill on the floor other than social security disability we voted on in the budget act. so again, i think that's the real message here is we got to approach legislating a lot differently as opposed to just think we're going to make a systemic change. i think all the problems that bedevil the system that we have now will bedevil the one we have. to go back to mr. mcclintock's remarks, i think there are other unintended consequences in terms of loss of oversight and institutional power just by simply elongating the time. anyway, with that i thank my friend for allowing me to offer reflection. >> compliments to all of you for making very good arguments on

both sides of the issue. thank you mr. chairman for having this hearing. yield back my time. >> thank you all for being here. substantial commitment of your time. i appreciate that. you've got sitting behind you three students from emery university. if you're ever going to have young people on who are counting on us to get this right come to a hearing, it's one with a kind of serious bipartisan search for solutions that this one has been. i appreciate the encouragement as i know they do as well. this hearing with the permission of the ranking member is adjourned. >> thank you. [inaudible conversations]

[inaudible conversations] >> executives from leading tech companies across the control beyond capitalism and to testify about cybersecurity at a house science faith in technology hearing live at 9 a.m. on c-span3. >> house foreign affairs committee chair ed royce will talk about national security and foreign policy at the american enterprise institute. we will bring it to you live at 9 a.m. eastern on c-span2.

>> as president obama prepares for state of union address on tuesday he released this video on twitter. >> i'm working on my state of the union address. it's my last one and as i'm writing i did think about the road we traveled together these past seven years. that's what makes america great, our capacity to change for the better. our ability to come together as one american family and pull ourselves closer to the america we believe in. it's hard to see sometimes in the day-to-day noise to washington but it is who we are. and it is what i want to focus s on in his state of the union address.

>> c-span's coverage starts at 8 p.m. eastern with senate historian and real clear politics congressional reporter looking back at history and tradition of the president's annual message in what to expect in this year's address. then at night our live coverage of the presidents speech followed by the republican response by south carolina governor nikki haley, push a reaction by phone, facebook, tweets and e-mails as well as those from members of congress. on c-span, c-span radio and c-span.org. we will read their our state of the union coverage and republican response starting at 11 p.m. eastern, 8 p.m. pacific. also live on c-span2 after the speech we will hear from members of congress in statuary hall with their reaction to the president address. >> the potomac institute for policy studies hosted a discussion on the israeli-palestinian conflict. scholars and diplomats with expertise in the region talked

about what's needed to create stability and lasting peace in the middle east. this is about an hour and 45 minutes. >> ladies and gentlemen, we would like to start. would you kindly turned off your cell phone? good afternoon. my name is yonah alexander. and the director of the international center for terrorism studies that is

administered by the potomac institute for policy studies, international center for terrorism studies. as well as the inter- university center for legal studies that international law institute in cooperation with many academic institutions, universities around the world, specifically i would like to mention the center for national security of the university of virginia school of law. on behalf of the potomac institute, he extends his welcome to you, unfortunately he is out of the country as i understand. at any rate, on spf and our

colleague and device presidents in the back, tom o'leary who is with us and, of course, general gray who is the chairman of the board of regents at the 29th commandant of the marine corps, and he joined us, and as always -- at any rate, let me welcome the speakers first right here. professor mohammed dajani to my left is currently a fellow at the washington institute, and he obviously contributes a great deal i think to understand

moderate islam. he serves as a professor of religious science at the university in jerusalem, and it will make -- you will make a presentation today and, obviously, many of you are familiar with the very distinguished contribution and involvement of his family in jerusalem. we have obviously the information about the speakers so i won't go into details. our speaker from the israeli embassy in washington, a deputy head of mission, reuven azar, will also participate. and he also is well-known to the audience here. he participated in a number of

our seminars and contributed to our report on the israeli-palestinian peace process, and so forth. now, basically our mission i think today is to deal with the question of jerusalem, whether the escalating tension and violence in recent months, at least the last three months, can ignite the religious war in the middle east and beyond. and yet at the time of christmas that the world is celebrating peace on earth, the question arises whether the spirit of the

sacred city of jerusalem, the city that is honored will encourage building the foundations for domestic peace in the middle east and the holy land and so on. this and other issues will be included. discussions, for example, the historical context, background of jerusalem, the political and legal aspect as well as the various related issues, the role of religion, for example. so i would like to invite the speakers, they will take over in a few minutes, i would like to

thank c-span radio and television for bringing this seminar to the attention of a wider audience into united states and internationally. in addition to that as always we like to mention anniversary dates related to violence with the hope that perhaps we can diffuse some of the negative aspects of the religion is asian a complex and try to advance the cause of peace with justice. so number one, we remember the victims of violence and terrorism. let me mention two specifically. one, in fact, related to today's

date december 21, 1988, which is the 27th anniversary of the pan american flight 103 that was destroyed over lockerbie, scotland, 259 passengers were killed. most of them of course americans, and 11 on the ground in lockerbie. and many of you will remember that libya was responsible for the tragedy. and also on christmas day 2009, the 16th anniversary -- the sixth anniversary, the nigerian who attempted to destroy, to detonate plastic explosives on the northwest flight 253 over

detroit. of course, he was connected with the al-qaeda in the arabian peninsula. and clearly we have to remember many of the other victims, particularly in recent time, all the way from paris to california to angara, beirut, jerusalem, the sinai, and so forth. one short note as moderator, i feel that i am really a jerusalem light, for 25 years i lived, studied and worked in jerusalem. although my family came to

palestine the first group came in 1921 in the early '30s, and i grew up in the city of tel aviv but i always considered myself member of the population of jerusalem on the academic level, i was involved in teaching at the university for some 25 years related to war and peace and terrorism. now, i would like to mention specifically in june 1967, i had the great privilege and honor to open them out scoopers campus, specifically since the do have a few lawyers of their, at the law

school. and i had a group of students, about 30 students who came from the united states and other countries. so the first assignment that i gave to the students was not to write a paper, but to clean up the classroom that was not used for about 19 years because of the separation of the old city from the new city of the western city of jerusalem. and since that time we have scholars came from all over the world to join us and participate in our academic work, including some of the leaders of israel, sharon harris, yitzhak rabin, also a clergy christian muslims and others who participated in our work.

so again academically we focus on jerusalem for a very long time. i would just like to mention one particular study which is related to our topic today, not for publicity purposes, but back in 1973 we had a project at columbia university the school of journalism. how can religion advance peace across the middle east and produced a book on the role of communications in the middle east. i'm mentioning this because there is no way that one can discuss the issue of jerusalem separate from the arab palestinian conflict there, israeli conflict, or the conflict between islam and the

moslem world -- muslim world and international issue. so let me just begin by reminding all of us. we are familiar with jerusalem same way we are familiar with washington, moscow and berlin, and elsewhere. but again just remind us, what are we talking about going back to the old testament, the new testament, the temple in jerusalem, and professor dajani will go into some details right here, the church of the holy sepulcher. another which were talking about the sacred sites in jerusalem and its status of the sites and the mosques and, of course, the wedding wall, the western wall,

the remnants of the temple that have all the great built, and the mosque, and then, of course, the pilgrimage of pope francis to jerusalem, the wedding wall and elsewhere. so again i think we have a big agenda. and again the question i think that we're going to discuss today, what are the factors that encourage violence and terrorism? and perhaps might trigger a third world war, as some people predict. how can we defuse some of the negative theological elements from a political conflict related to israel, palestine,

and so on? and perhaps this can serve as a model for other conflicts around the world. so with this i would like to invite reuven azar to come up and discuss some of us. he. >> thank you, yonah. good morning, everybody. it's a pleasure for me to appear here in the potomac institute again. i think that the key for peace, if you want to avoid confrontation or, the key is acceptance. acceptance come in its acceptance of the other. i could speak year for a whole hour, maybe for a whole day regarding the connection between the jewish people and jerusalem, and talk about the history of

jerusalem, how was established as capital of the israeli kingdom backing david 3000 years ago, but the first and the second temple, and the fact that jews pray three times a day everyday for going back to jerusalem to restore jerusalem as the capital and the place to which the temple is restored, et cetera. we mentioned jerusalem funerals and weddings. it's part of, part and parcel. but in order to get to peace we have to accept also the other, and the other has to accept us. another thing that we have to do is instead of exploiting religion to radicalized, we have to exploit religion to moderate, the course of moderation. i that is a very difficult task, especially today. because unless we defeat the

radicals, we won't be able to do it. sometimes i'm hearing in the last few months here in washington and other places, when it comes to isis able to isis our ignorance unfortunately they are not. their methods are terrible, but the leaders of isis have an ideology and they are educated. so the problem we have is that the radicals are educated. and unless we defeat them it will be very difficult to promote the message of acceptance of the other and to use religion to promote moderation. now, one of the problems we have in jerusalem, i'm also a jerusalemite, i was raised there, is that religion is being manipulated. in the last spark of violence that we're suffering from now, before that there was a campaign, a well-organized campaign actually by the islamic movement in israel, claimed that

israel wants to change the status quo of the temple mount. now, this is not the first time that religion is being manipulated in that way. it goes back to the beginning of the conflict. even upon before '67 but before '48. in 1929, for example, with a terrible massacre happened in jerusalem, the very old community was erased from the map. people were killed. it was part -- start by initiative of jews in the wedding wall to put a separation between men and women. so this sparked a rumor that the jews are going to take over the temple mount. and what happened is that before the '20s it was well known, including in the publications at

that time, i think with the washington institute that found this booklet actually in the library of congress or icons -- archives that said that temple is the same location in which the temple of solomon was. and actually the term is something that is well known. actually one of the isis related organizations celebrate. they exist in the sinai. so this trying to rejectionists of trying to rewrite history and disconnect the narrative of jews and the connections with the holy land was part of a

nationalistic, anti-nationalistic or anti-zionist movement and was actually there the seed of what we know today as the palestinian movement. although the first, those rejections from the first ones, they were not necessarily defined themselves as palestinian. so how can we deal with rejectionists? that is a very, very difficult challenge because, and i followed it when i served in jordan. we were dealing on a day-to-day basis of trying to settle this problem that we have. when we came to jerusalem back in 1967, after all these years, hundreds of and thousands of years of praying for jerusalem, when they came to the temple

mount, to the haram al-sharif, he sat on the floor. he called for the priest and he gave them the key to the temple. the idea of the leaders at the time was that in order for us to solve the conflict, what we have to do at the end of the day to separate between religion and religious rights competition religious tolerance and not to take over. the places are sacred for the other. another very important event was in 1994 when prime minister rabin signed the peace agreement, the peace accord with the jordanians. because that was the first time that any leader in the world recognized the role of the hashemites on the haram al-sharif your wife israel to the? israel wanted to maintain and to promote idea that you can separate and sovereign the just issued separately from national issues. we have a national conflict we

have to solve it. but if we draw region into the conflict we won't be able to solve its we have to respect other religions and respect the role and also a religious role of the legitimacy in the region. it was very interesting because at that point in time no other arab leader has declared that it respects the role of the hashemite family and the hero. israel was the first one. last year, it was two years ago there was a second one to recognize the role of the hashemite family and the hashemite kingdom of jerusalem. so in the last few years think we are also having another phenomena that is worried for us because although israel is a democracy and we respect religion and we are being

although we're being attacked for many years, there is a radicalization process initialed itself as well. and we have jewish radicals. of course, you cannot compare what's going on in the region but we have to do without. we've seen in the last year or two and increase in the number of victims of jewish care, and we've seen some people in israel are trying to call for the change in the temple mount, and the hero. district in the harem. would issue is time to diversify to fight a radicalization. but all this means. president, prime minister, security forces as much of the can in order to thwart those radicals with the other people that are trying to promote violence. but also i think the government has come out and said very

clearly, the prime minister said very clearly that israel will not change the status quo in the temple mount. there is incitement of relatives, propaganda, and people around the arab world are completely sure the issue wants to take over the mosque with the haram al-sharif, but we are not going to do that because we believe that although jerusalem, and although the place which is the most sacred place for us, has a connection to us or we have to respect it. also the aspirations and the religions of others. so just to wrap it up, i will say that if we manage to find partners that will not only will join us in promoting moderation but also will recognize our

narrative, then we have a chance of negotiating peace. you know, we have negotiated come even jerusalem, in the last two years under the barack government, turn the other covert and suggestions on the table work very, very revolution and very ambitious. i think that we can get to that point when we hear from the other side come from the leaders of the palestinians, lives of the arab world that they're willing to recognize the historic connection of the jews to the whole event and to jerusalem. the religious connection at the national connection to if we manage, equator.com if the israelis to the from the other side i think there will be much more room to compromise on the issue of jerusalem. so that's more or less wraps it

up. thank you very much. >> before we let you go, i know you have a schedule conflict here, but let me ask you some questions. number one, to provide some clarity, you mentioned the role of jordan in particular, but their unique role, and just for transparency, we invite also the diplomats from the embassy of jordan, because of schedule conflict they couldn't make it. clearly, by the way, i attended ceremony, peace between jordan and israel. now, the question is related to the status, number one, of jerusalem. the whole idea of the internationalization of jerusalem that was initially

advanced as the petition of the resolution of 1947 and later on. secondly, the status of the sacred sites, not only in jerusalem, not held for like bethlehem, nazareth and so forth. so in other words, since we do have a number of lawyers here, i felt this would be of great interest. thank you. >> again here we have to separate between national rights and religious rights. we have a conflict with the palestinians. we think that jerusalem is the capital of israel because of our connections that were already mentioned with the city. this is something we have to settle with the palestinians. and there were different stages in which we negotiated such a solution. on the religious side i think that we have to stick to the

principle that we are not going to mix religious rights with national rights. and it's interesting because in our area of the world, unlike in the west, our model of democracy, we don't separate religion and state. but even though we don't separate religious and stay, because from a cultural and religious reasons, we can do the separation at a think this can help us in getting into the solution. such solutions when it comes to control of religious sites, we are already almost there because the holy tonight is controlled i christians and the haram al-sharif is controlled by the mouth. the wailing wall is controlled by jews. so we can find, when it comes to

religion, as long as everybody has a right to exercise their religion, we can find a solution. >> maybe we can go deeper into this issue. the claim, for example, that israel is trying to change the status quo on the temple mount and so forth, and again, this actually does encourage i think more sanctions environment. it reminds me very vividly going back to 1969 when i was again teaching in jerusalem, and there was an australian christian who set fire to the mosque in

jerusalem. have this implant actually not only the people in jerusalem, the palestinians, the arabs, but muslims all over the world. so my question is, what is basically israeli policy vis-à-vis to preserve the status quo in jerusalem and elsewhere? >> allocated an example. when i was in jordan i saw that there is something going on in the jordanian press. the jordanian press was translating the protocols of the meetings of the israeli knesset, in which members of knesset, of israel, were asking why cannot jews, to the mosque and pray? because it would be their natural right, according to them. so the jordanian opposition was

translating that, and that created the sort of series of attacks of the opposition in jordan against the jordanian government, against the king. and it played into the conspiracy theory that the leader of the islamic movement in israel, incorporates with hamas. it played into this game. so it didn't help how many times israel said it's not going to change the status quo, it doesn't matter whether israeli police actually polices the place at every jew that comes to the temple mount or to the haram al-sharif is being watched by police we doesn't open his mouth and pray. it's so delicate. the government is doing its work

but the problem is there's a lot of people around that are trying, the coupling with this, play with his because they are z. let's or because you want to benefit from this politically. at our challenge is to cope with it. so fortunately we are not engaged with entertaining government. we're trying to advance this project of putting cameras on the temple mount so people have a chance to look directly live what's going on there. usually what needs to happen is that because of the fact that people that are linked with the islamic movement used to go to the mosque, stay there for the night, and in the morning try to disrupt either jews that were coming as the tourists to the amount of throw stones at the wailing wall. so before the last jewish feast to getting of the year, there

was a plot actually to use explosives. and that was something that we foiled and that generated this whole series of incitement and violence, et cetera. so we have a challenge. as much as with whoppers and from the jordanians, and we wish we had cooperation from the palestinian leadership, not to promote inside, actually to condemn that. if we have that we can take control of the situation. that if we don't, things will continue to be a very serious problem for us. >> before we opened up to questions from the audience, this will relate maybe to your experience, again, in the mount and cairo and the peace negotiations. because many people are concerned that you cannot solve the problem of jerusalem without

solving the palestinian-israeli conflict with the palestinian authority and so forth. are you pessimistic or optimistic that, that particular conflict, not only between the palestinians and the israelis, but the israelis with some of the other arab countries such as saudi arabia and the muslim world can largely be resolved and thereby you can also resolve the issue with jerusalem? >> i'm optimistic, first of all, because i'm an optimistic person. but in addition to that i'm optimistic because first of all i believe in the power of the jewish people and the state of israel to prevail. but i'm also optimistic because i think something very substantial is going on in the region know, and in the world.

people understand what are the dangers of militant islam or radical islam. and people in the region also understand how in their mind they are by despite an ideology. a few years ago when i was, we were doing our annual research, my present position i was head of research, and we identified through a phenomenon that is actually a stabilizer within the stabilized region that we have. and his stabilizer, we call it come instead of calling it the crest of the neighbors is always greener, we say the grass of the neighbor is actually darker. when, for example, arab israelis, what's going on in the region, or when palestinians in the west bank look at what's going on in gaza. had a look at what's going on in syria. many people have a sense of how

threatened they are by the radical forces but it's not because they're becoming suddenly in love with israel, okay? at the understand what is realistic and what is not. understand that first of all for example, as ever israelis favor a chance to fight for equality. jordanians and egyptians understand that israel is a forceful stability in the region. and it doesn't generate love for zionism. but it generates a realistic sense that we have to work together to fight extremism, to fight the iranians to come to fight ices, to fight all the other threats we have in the region right now. and in that sense i think that we have a chance. are cooperating much more than in the past with the jordanians, with the egyptians. we -- with the palestinian forces because they know that if we don't cooperate, at the end

of the day hamas and islamic jihad at isis, in jamaica, they will take over. so if we manage to exacerbate that into cooperate, combined with strong leadership and the peace process, that includes acceptance, then i think we will be better off. >> also have a chance for the audience to ask some questions. you have a question or a comment? >> hi. my name is ron taylor. i'm a senior fellow with the george washington university center for simon and homeland security, but i do a lot in counterterrorism. so from the outside, the mideast always looks unstable, and stability, and stability are sort of a time, had the time dependence to them.

you know, whether you are stable for long time, a short period of time is a kind of a relative thing. and i guess my question is, you know, what do you see as the future of come and take his kid off of your comments about israel being a force for stability, and i can see that in other countries in the region. what do you see as the future for the nation-state itself in that area? because, you know, that also is an example of possible degeneration of the nation-state concept. >> right. i think that's a great question and this is a question i was trying to discuss with my researchers back in jerusalem, and when we are looking at the region. are many years were look at the region, we had to bark and assad and hussein. it's like it was a very thrilling, not very stable. we didn't foresee the many changes.

-- mubarak. might have to open every day the new organizations and people that are becoming active in the region. so some point i told my team, look, let's stop looking at countries but let's start looking at institutions. we charge the institutions in the region that you can count on to be influenced, to be invalid, and when it comes -- influenced you can when it comes to your question what are the institutions we can embrace and we can bring forth in order to cooperate? so when you look at the egyptian army, for example, people are not very prone or they don't like the army and i can understand that when it comes to israel also it's not very encouraging. there is this famous joke about, not famous, maybe it will be no, about when the muslim

brotherhood had broken the cease-fire between tissue and hamas. so many nationalists in egypt were saying he's a zionist. know, his cooperate with the israelis. and when sese brokered a cease-fire between israel and hamas, the musli muslim brotherd was saying he is a sinus. so if both of them were right, most of them would be scientist but unfortunate they were both robert this is the situation dictates of the institutions we have. it is the egyptian army whether it is the muslim brotherhood or any other force from any other institution that takes power, we have to look, if it's not completely come it's not completely diplomatic oh because it gives everybody like assad arises. we have to see how to enforce those players and those institutions. and jordan you have a strong government, a strong intelligence service. so you structures. you have a strong financial banking system. let's work with those.

let's reinforce those that have a chance to deliver, okay? the same goes to the palestinian authority. we have a process of 20 years in which we invested, okay, we are not saying israelis, maybe would have invested, if would have invested more we would be better off. but you have an investment of 20 years. that's great. you have apparatus that work. so how can we change that? how can we make the palestinian security apparatus to deliver for palestinians, including against hamas? if we succeed in the maybe we will have a palestinian state. the approach custody both ways. -- the approach custody both ways. >> high. thank you for your time here. if there's to be negotiated

mutual recognition, palestinians would like to raise the flag in jerusalem. and at one time that was a no-no by israelis. is it conceivable that the arab sector, jerusalem, can become a palestinian capital as we'll speak with the will be up to the leaders at the time to determine. we can be in a theoretical situation that this is off somewhere or another, and a flag is part of the solution. now, you can imagine and you have to imagine everything if you want to reach a settlement. but the question is how to get there. because we fought for many years, and people are telling us especially a batch of the arab spring, you should have, you should have a fetish for loading the people. one of those difficult things, most difficult challenges they face here in washington is to

sort of give the sense of the israeli psyche. now professor dajani worked on that ended remarkable work in trying to pass the psyche of israelis to palestinians. but i'm fading as an israeli to communicate the psyche of israelis to americans. because when you see isis decapitating summits in syria, people who get very mobilize and to want to fight radical islam, right? imagine what happens to israelis in times like this when this was going on in the region. how more conservative they become. how much risk averse they become. so of course we don't want to be in a situation right now that we give territory back and you haven't isis flag on the other side of the border. so we have to built bottom up in order to secure the region by having a player there that would be pro-western, that would be

democratic and that will be uncorrupt, that will make the future palestinian state thrive. and not as kissinger said, i think it was two months ago, when he came, not establish another arab failed state on our border. we don't want that. ..

so i'd like to hear, also one more question. moses came out of egypt, 3,000 years, 4,000 years, how many jewish people we have in the world? >> last question, today the estimation there are about 18 million jews. the jewish religion, unlike christianity and islam is not in the business of getting more converts. being a jai was very difficult for many centuries reason you already know. attacks against jews, et cetera.

going back to your question, we will feel secure when we have a situation which we have no more rejection but acceptance and that we have security. because if you have, even the, not only israeli right, the israeli extreme right is not in favor of controlling the lives palestinians. question whether we get into regime strong enough that will maintain security in a way that we can also withdraw from places in which we mutually agree with palestinians that will be the future palestinian state. that can happen in five years, 10 years, i don't know. we have to work on it so it happens. >> thank you very much. mike craft. old middle east counterterrorism analyst. my question is about jerusalem itself. i first visited as young

reporter before the '67 war and it was pretty deadly city frankly. i've been there since then and there is fair amount of integration. you would see arab families in the street and in the malls and things of that sort. since the recent outbreak of violence i understand barriers have been put up between two sides of jerusalem and city is more or less divided. do you foresee things will go back to quote, normal or very quickly if the violence ends, or how do you see the future of jerusalem functioning as a city? >> unfortunately we have experience with that. we've seen waves of violence before and as much as the waves were higher, the security measures were also tighter. what we're trying to do this time, i think what the government is trying to do is so keep normal life as much as they can. i give you one example.

movement of palestinian workers to israel. there are about 120,000 palestinians from the west bank coming to israel to work every day. although a very small number of them, one or two, have been involved in stabbings, the israeli government is withstanding a lot of pressure from cabinet members and a lot of people to put closure on west bank. when it comes to jerusalem itself we have erected this fence and wall in jerusalem. in the second intifada we didn't want to do that. the right-wing in israel was against it. left-wing and center were for it because they wanted to protect themselves from attacks. they wanted to protect life which is the main right that you have. now whether we can redo that? i hope that we can. i hope we not only see this wave

of violence waning but we reach a settlement, we can remove those security measures and we've seen in the past, after the second intifada, after the situation was stablizing we removed many restrictions. >> [inaudible] >> do you have a question? okay. one more question. >> hi, daphne -- [inaudible] you see isis escalation around the world right now. do you foresee any change in the government position now or in, in israeli government positions? >> regarding what? >> regarding peace and regarding security? >> i think that prime minister netanyahu said in his last visit to washington that, first of all we have the opportunity to cooperate with our arab neighbors, arab countries that are interested like us in

fighting radical, islamic radicals, in fighting attempts to change, to sub verse their own regimes and we can maybe, in the right circumstances create a dialogue, regional dialogue, that will conducive to the bilateral effort announced with the palestinians. we have reason and hope to do that. as i said before we will have to overcome a lot of animosity and fear created exactly by these kind of forces. and, you know, i don't have to go far away. what happened after several attacks of isis in this hemisphere, how people are reacting in this hemisphere and this country. also israelis have to overcome that. the mere fact -- one of the great traumas of this nation is 9/11. israel has been in 9/11 for the

last 67 years. so, the possibility to change psyche and to go from a situation which you become less risk-averse is going to be enormous challenge. we have to work together with our neighbors to try to lower those barriers of fear. >> okay. i know you have to leave. i can not resist but ask you final question. we focus on the palestinian and some of the arab states. can you comment on the role of iran? of course everyone is looking, the iranian nuclear issue but how is the link with the issue in jerusalem? in other words, iranian and non-arab states view related to the solution of the jerusalem problem?

>> well, this is another impediment. the iranian revolution created what they call quds day. you have marchs in tehran every year. today the iranian regime wants to challenge not only the legitimacy of israeli control of jerusalem but also the legitimacy of control of the saudis of mecca. it is a much larger conflict and rivalry that you have there and the other problem is that the iranians are much more powerful. the capabilities of isis are very intimidating but what happens with countries that are trying to possess nuclear weapons? they have missile technology and forces in the region they're working to with players like assad and others. that is much more difficult challenge but i think we've proved in the past that we can overcome that.

when, for example, we did, also with the palestinians. yes iranians were there in '94 to try to foil that, to promote hamas and promote suicide attacks of hamas. we'll have all the time iranians trying to foil any peace we broker between us and palestinians and arabs. we seen subversion of iran in jordan, for example. we have a challenge but it does not mean we can not continue the strife for peace. >> thank you very much for coming. i know you have to leave. we will continue with professor dajani. thank you very much. [applause] [inaudible] >> thank you very much. i'd like to thank professor alexander and the potomac institute for inviting me. what i would like to do is, and

to explore the issue of jerusalem and offering insights on how to resolve the problem i will start by introducing my family association with the city and talk a little bit about the history of the city and then discuss some potential way of trying to resolve the problem of the city. actually in 1520 nine ottoman appointed my great-grandfather as custodians of the king david tomb. and then the first mayor, ottoman empire started municipalities in the empire by having one in istanbul. the second one was in jerusalem. after rachman dajani was

appointed mayor and became mayor in 1918. this is picture of family in 1942. this is my father's wedding. actually in 1948 the dajani family saved the family hiding them in their own arab quarter and jewish quarter fell and saving the buber library from being burnt. that is the family association. there is a lot but i just mention this. there is verse in the koran reflects this talk i'm going to talk about. we should say ultimately that between people and so that's why what i will be focusing and what i'm saying, the rule over jerusalem has been alter nated between the muslim, the christian, and the jew.

and so it is basically the, from the ancient, throughout it is history jerusalem has been the site of glories and catastrophes. this has been witness to transition and occupation by a diversity of nations and target of pilgrimage throughout the nations. jews believe the red sea was open to allow jews to cross safely and then closed to drown pharaoh and his army and moses spoke to god on mount sinai and received from him the ten commandments. christians believe jesus resurrected dead and must sims believes the journey of muhammad and to jerusalem where he met archangel gabriel and deascended to heaven and met the prophets and god. part of the solution of conflict is respect the narrative of the

other and not to deny it or refute it. in six teen 38 muslims -- 1638 muslims conquered jerusalem. they were taken to the church of the holy sepulcher. when time for prayer invited to pray in the church which they would turn churches into mosques which some did later. he prayed outside and on theside of the worship arose the mosque of omar. you will be finding the mosque of omar where he prayed. he has to be taken to the sacred rock which prophet muhammad ascended to heaven. he built a mosque near it called al-aqsa mosque. to allah jews to return and reside in jerusalem after being banned from doing so. later they built the dome of the

rock of the mosque, prepared to sacrifice his son and it was said that noah had put the ship of noah landed on that rock which is very holy. so basically in 1852 they issued proclamation allowed rights of christians in jerusalem and status quo should prevail. the status quo has been respected until this very day. they surrendered the city of jerusalem in 1917. to coincide with christmas celebrations to give this conquest victory, religious aura.

austrian troops left the city in 1916. he dismounted from his horse on foot and out of respect for the city. and it was partly a response to the pompous entry of german kaiser wilhelm ii on visit on white horse 1898. and thus the wall was partly breached to accommodate him. both of those visits has harmed jerusalem. one the visit of kaiser where the wall was actually breached in order to allow him to go in and the began the gate there. he walked in on foot. then he, he actually delivered the victory speech pledging jerusalem to be the city of peace. in november of '47 the u.n. par cities resolution decided to

internationalize the city. so basically it was divided and, and palestine was divided into arab state and a jewish state and jerusalem was supposed to be internationalized including bethlehem. however the fighting, when the british left, palestine, the the british general asked to whom did you leave palestine? his response was i left the key under the doormat stress. 85% of the jerusalem was captured by jewish forces which became west jerusalem. 11% of the city including old city fell under control of jordan, and 4% of the city was considered no-man's land which the u.n. headquarters was established.

so on december 13th, 1949 declared west jerusalem for israel in violation of the u.n. resolution. on de19 the u.n. responded by restating the intention placing jerusalem under international regime however the city remained divided under israeli and jordanian rule. in 1967 israel reunited east and west jerusalem but the city remained divided socially and psychologically. in june '67 israeli jurisdiction to jerusalem despite international law. this is the crux of the problem, because people would say, why should israel give up jerusalem or should concede anything in jerusalem? so the question lies here in international law because in

1948 jewish forces captured west jerusalem and later delated it capital of israel overriding the 194u.n. resolution to internationalize the city. in '67 israeli forces captured east jerusalem and later declared it eternal capital of israel overriding a u.n. resolution not to change the character of the city. i would come to that, to the significance of this later. however israel kept the administration of the harem sharif compound, continued to be maintained by jordanians. in september 1993 declaration of israel included jerusalem to be negotiated at later stage. the israeli foreign minister at time, shimon peres, promised nothing will hamper of their

activity on the contrary the fulfillment of this important mission is to be encouraged. reaffirmed the status of jordan as custodian for the holy places. so here we have three initiatives that also focused on jerusalem and granting the palestinians and the israelis equal status in jerusalem which was the road map, the clinton plan and also the arab peace initiative. they were also joint initiatives between palestinians and israelis calling for the formation of a palestinian state and having jerusalem serve for the, as capital for both -- city of jerusalem has a special place in the consciousness of one of the great religions.

for centuries it has been divided center of worship for three world religions, jews, christians and islam. any consideration would should take the historical attachment of the three religions to the city. we have three clashing narratives. palestinians think the jerusalem as prospective state of palestine. israel maintains that jerusalem as united is eternal capital but without international recognition. so basically what i would like to focus on is the present status. we have 350,000 palestinians in east jerusalem who have residency rights in jerusalem. they carry a blue identity card. they can move from jerusalem to the west bank or even from jerusalem to israel without any problem. the old israeli identity cards

which give them the right to work and move freely across the country and to cross-check points and the separation wall built in 2003. 145,000 palestinian residents live outside the jerusalem separation wall while 195 live inside of the separation wall and more than 10,000 palestinians who live in jerusalem do hold israeli citizenship. however here we, it is important to note that the clash in jerusalem between the palestinians, israelis is focused also on the way things are in the sense that there are negative side to the israel policies in israel. although palestinians benefit a lot from being residents of east jerusalem, from the israelis

particularly in health care. palestinians have much better health care in jerusalem as residents of jerusalem than they do in the west bank or in gaza. even they take good, benefit a lot from the health care, israeli health care system. however, they suffered from also the certain policies that are there which is one, judiazation of the city, which even streets and names have been replaced. israel put three languages, hebrew, english and arabic. but now tendency is only to put hebrew, or hebrew and english. also they have stripped palestinians from residency rights. this is very serious problems that actually makes palestinians very insecure and unstable

because of this threat that anytime that i.d. can be revoked so we have poor public services in palestine compared to the, in east jerusalem compared to west jerusalem. there is a big gap what we call west jerusalem and east jerusalem. although east jerusalem comprises 72% of the israel's total population they pay 70% of the city's budget but less than receive 5% of the municipal budget. -- 30%. this has been improving that the municipality is peying more attention to east jerusalem it was not. so the, jerusalem municipality invests six times on jewish

residents than palestinian residents. you can see that in public services like parks, like chin and clinics and different facilities within the city. for instance the municipality is in charge of israeli schools where the students are being provided with a lot of facilities while actually the same, same palestinian schools are in very bad conditions. so actually, when you are talking about young kid who, who takes a knife and goes and commits terrorism, it is also in the education because they're receiving very bad education. he hates to go to schools because there are no facilities and this is also part of the problem that we are having. the buildings are converted to schools. crammed school classes. schoolyards, there are not much sports facilities, no computer labs or libraries.

no heating in freezing winter, poor lighting. so we are having a lot of problems with students. this is why students hate to go to school. we have to make them love to come to school rather than be in the street. that is also part of the problem. also, the home, the policy is affecting their psychology and there there is a lot of despair as a result of the political stalemate and frustration from social and economic neglect which have resulted in explosions as we see what is happening today. militant muslim extreme its have exploited deteriorating conditions to intensify the tensions. so also here we have the problem there is a lot of donations that air racks and others have -- arabs and others made to improve the conditions of palestinians in jerusalem yet the money disappears either with the pa or

with the, with the leaders of the, religious leaders of the community. so the palestinians do not see much of those donations. here if we want to seek solutions we have to seek solution for jerusalem issue. we need to filter out the symbolism, religious and other tones national strategy from the political reality. the political reality today is that israel rules the city but without international sovereignty recognition. this is where the problem lies, in the sense why should israel be able to actually share jerusalem. what will israel get if it does want to share, international recognition. that is actually part of the what israel may benefit from a

deal on jerusalem. so if we look at jerusalem, we noted that jerusalem originally is divided into two cities in reality. this is the old city which is divided into four quarters. the jewish quarter christian, armenian and muslim. the vast areas have been annexed to jerusalem. if you see the old city, it is very small. it is more than 30% of that area has been added, annexed to the city. and so this is where, if we look at jerusalem, we see a twin city, this is the holy city referred to by religious holy books is in the old city and all, and, the old city was surrounded by a wall built by the ottomans. so basically we have there the three holy places.

that is why this is the old city is the holy city. so this is the old city. so basically only the old city and its immediate surroundings constitute historic what we call jerusalem. jerusalem being mentioned in the bible and different holy books. it is the old city. so, but it is the municipal city that has been added. if you notice, it has been added in a very erratic way. why? in order to include areas and then exclude population there. so it is very odd way. notice the old city it is there. the rest is not jerusalem. when you want to decide on the future of jerusalem you have to make that distinction between the old city and municipal city. the city that has been enlarged.

to agree on conciliation in the midst of conflict we need to agree on such issues as municipal service, day-to-day living problems, status of holy places and agree to disagree on issues such as political sovereignty. so the proposed solution is to have the holy old city, to have a special international jewish, christian, muslim custodian ship while the new city is a shared local custodianship. east which is muslim and christian and the west which is jewish and city would be without barriers or restrictions. israel would transfer of responsibilities of sewage, roads, schools, health care and social services in east

jerusalem to the palestinians. taxes collected from the palestinian residents would be transferred to be used to improve living conditions in jerusalem neighborhoods. if we look at that, whether it's a win-lose situation the way it is now standing, whether it is ethnically divided religiously and psychologically, israel retains control of the city but unrecognized by the international community. it is a win-win situation if we share the city. this way to have the city open to the world to come and pray and particularly to the muslim, christian and jewish communities. and this way it will be recognized by the international community. it will bring in security and stability. so thank you very much. that is actually my take on

this, on this, thank you very much. >> thank you very much. [applause] >> obviously your -- we have many questions for benefit of our young students here and future leaders, it really reflects the complexity of the issue and also approaches the problem, we have to look at interdisciplinary approach all the way from the historical and second quarter logical and religious and -- socialogical and religious and political and so forth. let me ask you specifically if i may, again to come back to the question of the internationalization of jerusalem, we tried to deal with

that to some extent before but as i recall very much individually the u.n. partition resolution that, in 1947 actually recommended that the status of jerusalem can be decided in about 10 years whether the three religions would turn the city into an international city. triagely, that resolution and other resolutions were overcome by reality on the ground. the conflict for example, between israel and jordan, when jordan controlled in 1948 the east section of jerusalem. so what i'm really trying to say

that obviously provides opportunities for some sort of compromise because the art compromise is more thoughtful than judgements. but my question to you in regard to internationalization of jerusalem, again since now we are in the spirit of christmas, peace on earth, what do you think the religious communities can do to advance the cause of some sort of a solution in jerusalem with the spirits of jerusalem? for example, the pope, when he

visited the holy land several years ago and most recently in africa, for example, in the central african republic when he tried to bring together the muslims and the christians, he had a message of peace, of tolerance, ecumenical approach, how do you think in your long experience, and again because of your very distinguished family in jerusalem, how do you think the role of religion can be actually advancing some of the proposals that you made? >> actually, that's why i'm focusing on go two aspectses religious aspect and religious aspect. i'm thinking in terms of the old city to be dealt from the religious point of view and it's a holy place and people want to

come to pray, whether they are muslims, christians or jews or even non-muslim, non-christian or non- >>. this is holy place, people want to come to worship there. i think we should have a special custodian ship where actually it could be international, could be muslim, christian, jewish, international status, special status for the old city. and outside of the city is where we can deal politically. no matter what we say, what we do, outside the city the psychologically divided to arab sector where it is muslims and christians and palestinians and there is the west jerusalem which is the jewish sector and there is a psychological barrier and if you go to, if you want to

pick up a taxi from the israeli side and ask him to take you to the palestinian side, he will look at you and say, are you crazy to go up there? so the areas that are palestinians, israelis do not feel secure to go to. areas now which are israelis, palestinians do not feel secure. in the past palestinians used to go to the malls but now nobody is going to the mall or to the israeli section because they're afraid and there is fear on both communities. so basically what i'm saying is that we have to deal with that fear. we have, one way is to have recognition of each other rights, of each others history of each others attachment to the city and then this way to share

the city. so i'm not in favor of having east jerusalem to be the capital or west jerusalem to be political capitals. i believe they can be religious capitals and if we can have east jerusalem to be the religious capital of the palestinian, of palestine, the jerusalem could be the religious capital of israel and this way, we will be disassociate between the politics and religion because they are a explosive mix when they get together. if we can separate them i'm trying to do that, to separate the political from the religious, thinking of outside the city which is not holy, which has been annexed in the last five decades and when you talk about jerusalem, nobody

refers to that area as jerusalem, to divide hit politically between the two parties the two people, the two communities, without walls, without barbed wire without checkpoints, to have it open. this is my vision for the future. >> my question again -- [inaudible] seems to me, how would you respond to those jews that claim, if, for example, you establish a muslim regime in east jerusalem, you exclude the axis to the mount and wailing

wall and not only muslim issue and christian issue because our faith, the christian holy sites are very significant for the christian world. the church of the holy sepulcher, in fact the reality as we know, even within the church there is a separation between the catholic let's say and armenian, ethiopian, greek orthodox, in terms of control of the church itself. so what i'm trying to actually advance, i think the idea of our how religion can diffuse some of this negative elements from the political conflict and thereby try to find some political solution, which would correspond to the reality on the ground as

well? >> but that is exactly my point. what i'm saying, that we have, a special international religious, muslim, christian, jewish status for all cities, this includes all the holy places. the holy sepulcher is in the old city. the wailing wall is in the old city. the heart recommend sharif is in the old city. this is included what i'm say about a arab jerusalem which is outside of the wall. i'm separating between the holy places inside the wall, which are the holy places for all religions to, with, from the, from the area which is the municipal area outside the wall. so actually muslims will not have a mall say in the holy places or christians or jews.

what i'm trying to also include is the christian element because here people look at jerusalem and think as if it is a jewish, muslim conflict, it's not because actually christians own more land and property and holy places in jerusalem than both either muslims or jews. so basically that's why, what i'm saying we need to have custodian ship of the old city where holy places are by the three religions and outside to be divided into these two political entities outside of the city which does not include the holy places. >> right. let me ask you one more question, then we'll open this up for dialogue with the audience. my question to you is, again, i always try to look at common ground between the different

religions. what is really common between christianity and islam and judaism. this is the sanctity of human life. if we save one life it is as if we save the entire world. in other words how can we protect the individual in the communities and somehow reduce the element of fear that you were talking about and i fully agree with you, whether it is taxi driver to visit the mosque of omar or the wailing wall and so on? so my question to you again from a religious point of view and approach, in other words the message of the point, for example, can we establish a truce of god, a truce of god meaning immunity of the holy sites? in other words that christianity

and islam and. judaism will declare we're not using that element as friction and tension and conflict and explosion? in other words, together the religious leaders of the different community to unite and to come with a declaration of how we can protect the holy sites and exclude that region that you're talking about, east jerusalem from the palestinian israeli conflict in general and so on and so forth? i think perhaps it can be a powerful message to the entire world how we can coexist with each other. this is the purpose of those who were created by god, whether they are muslims, christians or jews or sikhs or members of any

other religion. so in other words, not to leave the decision on the status of jerusalem, for example, only to the politicians and diplomats but also to the spirit all leaders of the different religions? >> actually i believe that the three religions call for peace. i believe that judaism and christianity and islam are religions of peace and religions moved race. that is actually in the holy books. now step aside from the propaganda and media and things where people say islam is a religion of aggression, islam is this, more than 50,000 violent incidents have taken place